Skip to main content

About your Search

20121206
20121206
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
throughout china, even showed you numbers that said unlike yum, kentucky fried chicken, it hasn't seen any deceleration in china. these are my ears like i listen, these are my eyes, i've watched. howard schultz, call me crazy, made major fortunes investing with them, my bad. and then i heard the questions from the audience, i didn't even listen. what were they looking at versus what i was looking at? they were looking at john carter, i was looking at the new bond movie. one after another, they were all downbeat. is the expansion too rapid? is china any good? whether demand for expensive coffee is there. i was waiting for a guy to say, listen, that triple cappuccino stinks. if i were howard, i would tell them to take a hike. they were too negative versus what the company's up to. their pessimism? opportunity. starbucks was actually down. one time -- i have the apple ipad, you know, thing i'm like, wow, it's under 50. i mean, wow. terrific opportunity. ipad, i mentioned it, surprised one didn't come down and hit me over the head and knock me out. apple. if we're going off the fiscal cliff, w
a million reasons, well, it's a nokia phone, well, it's china. ipad miniis available. this is a stock that's so widely owned. it reminds me of sirius satellite. every doctor, every dentist owns apple. they don't know the price per share, they just know it is the proxy for the market. >> they just accelerated dividends. but i think we're talking now 150 companies in some fashion have accelerated or put forward a special dividend. you put forward a special market share, china is 76, with the market share at least. >> is it a disappointment that apple did not pay a special dividend? is that part of this? >> there was some of that. >> there was some expectation? not that they ever gave any voice to it. they never said a word about it. >> true. >> look, it is widely owned if the stock were -- it's obviously, here's the stock that went from 70 to 50, maybe it goes to 48, 45. everybody who doesn't know what apple is, other than the fact that they use an imac or iphone are selling it. and, look, if you're a hedge fund manager you went from thinking i have to own it, or i have to short it. . >> in
in tomorrow and said, get everybody out of china and do whatever you have to do, make these, make everything you make in the united states. what would that do to the price of this device? >> i honestly -- it's not so much about price, it's about the skills, et cetera. over time there are skills that are associated with manufacturing that have left the u.s. not necessarily people but the education stops producing them. >> that's sad. how do we get that back? sbl well, it is a concerted effort to get them back. with this project that i've talked about where we will do a mac in the united states next year? i think this is a really good another step for us. the consumer electronics world was really never here. so it is not a matter of bringing it back, it is a matter of starting it here. >> good morning. thanks for joining us here. >> reporter: while steve jobs liked to avoid the spotlight, he also thrived on it. it was as if he was selling products that were pieces of his own soul. he was inventor, pitchman and new wave pid piper all in one. big boss coming through. big boss, people. look alive
there that could be laying the ground work for strategic help for rebel groups. also for russia and iran and china and other countries that support the assad regime to perhaps distance themselves a little bit from the syrian president. we have all those reasons that are coming -- that are like the pieces of the puzzle. you make it out. is the threat of chemical weapons being used against the syrians an imminent threat? you have a lot of opinions out there that that's not the case right now. >> good balanced approach. we like that. a lot of people just kind of beating the drums here. want to get the other side as well. thank you, paula. >>> seran is the onlying nerve gas we've been talking about so far in sear yashgs but they -- >> military analysts believe that syria may have one of the most extensive chemical weapons stockpiles in the world spread through production and storage facilities throughout the country. this, they say, is a result of an aggressive development program started in the 1980s, aided by the russians and the iranians, and has been cause for concern before. not only because the
regime, international institutions like the u.n. for example. one is russia. the second is china. you have iran but iran is considered an outlaw in the international system today. these are the countries that are still supporting syria. and it is time for the russians to basically come clean about their support o a regime that is getting ready to use chemical weapons against its own people. syria is breaking down. syria is not libya. syria is in the middle of the lavant. if this break down will spill over into jordan, it will spill over into iraq and still over into lebanon. all these places are powder kegs waiting to, flowed. so the russians have moral responsibility to sit down with the international community and explain why they are still supporting this regime that is willing to use it seems, chemical weapons against its own people. that is not the first time these weapons have been used against innocent people in the middle east. remember saddam in the '80s, he used them against the kurds killing thousands and thousands of people. melissa: no. this is terrifying and devastating
opportunities in russia and new jobs here at home. our competitors in china and canada and europe are not taking advantage of these opportunities because they have pntr with russia, they already have it. we are the only w.t.o. member missing out on these opportunities. if we now pass pntr, we can level the playing field and compete, and if we compete we will win. we sell more beef, we sell more aircraft, we will sell more trademarks, we will sell more medical equipment and our banks and insurance companies will grow. pntr will give our knowledge industries greater protections for their intellectual property and our farmers will have new tools to fight unscientific trade barriers. if we pass pntr, american exports to russia are expected to double in five years. this bill has strong enforcement provisions to help ensure that american farmers, ranchers, businesses and exporters get the full benefit of pntr. and this bill has strong human rights provisions. senator cardin's magnitsky act punishes human rights violations in russia and helps to address the corruption problems russia now faces. in july
taking share in china, all the big carriers will be selling it and an omg product might be on the way. the market capitalization will still be outsized versus the rest of the market and that i don't like. there's nothing you can do about the rest of the market, right? as we settled three times today, if you want to measure the selloff here, use the 12 days of christmas approach. three nikes, four price lines, eight dells, nine coaches, ten may cy's, 11 ralph laurens, 12 mattells and a partridge and pear tree and it's still a $1 billion company. it goes down $100 billion in cash and plus it's growing. the price to earnings multiple, the apples to apples method so to speak will be the lowest in the whole s&p 500. that can and is happening. valuation will get so cheap that apple will be too compelling for informed people not to own. the company's not going to sell through all of the cash and respective cash and this company is one gigantic atm machine. and guess what? the chart with the nauseating terminology will be meaningless at that point. the technology, not the technicals will agai
.o. of big caterpillar equipment and talk about what's going on in china and i hope we get back to that. you're right that's all we're talking about instead of talking about caterpillar and what you do well as a great company. >> thank you. again, every time i come to the floor it's the hub of our greatness in this country of business. it's why we're here. it's really fun and exciting and let answer get into '13 and get into real things. i'm with you, joe. >> i know, but this deal has to play in peoria. >> it will play. >> compared to what you got in illinois now anything looks good. thanks. >> okay. >>> the executive chef tpz at jpmorgan the bank naming two chief officers to oversee things like anti-moneying. kayla tausche joins us. >> the person to watch everyone watching is looking at jez staly, he was chairman as of july largely viewed as a swank song role that rivals have taken note of. there were discussions over the ceo at legg mason, the baltimore asset manager. the talks fell apart and staly was the top of the short list for the board and recruiters after being serious talks for the
it is as far from that as i am from china right now. host: the president yesterday spoke about the debt ceiling and is tied to the fiscal cliff negotiations. [video clip] >> i have to tell you that is a bad strategy for america, a bad strategy for our businesses, and it is not a game that i will play. most of you were involved in discussions and watched the catastrophe that happened in august of 2011. everybody here is concerned about uncertainty. there is no uncertainty like the prospect that the largest economy that holds the world's reserve currency potentially defaults on its debts, that we give out the basic notion that the united states stands behind its obligations. we cannot afford -- host: whil"the wall street journal." guest: the president does not want to negotiate with the republicans on the debt ceiling. that is like giving a son or daughter a credit card to do with it as they want freely. i think the president has to admit that both sides have tried to break measures and legislations to the table that would reduce the debt ceiling. the president -- look at how the deficit has quad
with the challenges in europe, with china going through a transition, with india's political system, as chair of the india caucus, almost more this functional than ours. we look pretty darn good if we can put a real plan in place. >> what would be the size of the plan? >> i think it gets north of $4 trillion, whether it gets to $6 trillion. this goes back to where you start. two points -- kind of on the opening round questions. it is important to remember that the simpson-bowles plan, which has gained a lot of attention, or the gang of six, which is built off the simpson- bowles, the presumptions that went into those plans assumed that all the top rates would go back up. when you start from that, even though i think simpson-bowles's idea that he would bring the rates down to the high 20's is a bit of a stretch. i do not think we will see that kind of across the board almost zeroing out in some places of tax expenditures that would require. they can show a path towards meaningful tax reform even with the rates at the higher level. point two, and this is one of the things where i think those of
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)